← All Phrases

“faceless assessment”

Assessment ProceduresSection 144BSection 144B2,420 judgments

The decision most relied on for faceless assessment is Kankanala Ravindra Reddy v. ITO (156 Taxmann.com 178), cited in 213 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on faceless assessment

Kankanala Ravindra Reddy v. ITO
156 Taxmann.com 178 · 2023 · High Court
213
citing judgments

A notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if the Income Tax Department fails to follow the prescribed procedures, including obtaining the necessary approvals under section 151 or adhering to the faceless assessment scheme mandates under section 151A.

Jatinder Singh Bhangu v. Union of India
165 Taxmann.com 115 · 2024 · High Court
106
citing judgments

The faceless assessment scheme under Section 151A applies from the stage of issuing show cause notices under Sections 148 and 148A, and non-compliance with the scheme or related notifications vitiates the subsequent assessment proceedings. Assessment proceedings are considered to commence upon the issuance of such a show cause notice.

Ram Narayan Sah v. Union of India
163 Taxmann.com 478 · 2024 · High Court
97
citing judgments

A notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, cannot be issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer after the introduction of faceless assessment under Section 151A read with Section 144B. Such a notice is invalid as it defeats the object of faceless assessment and is not in consonance with CBDT notifications.

T.K.S. Builders (P) Ltd. v. ITO
469 ITR 657 · 2024 · High Court
88
citing judgments

Section 144B of the Income Tax Act does not completely divest the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) of their power to assess or reassess, even with the introduction of the Faceless Reassessment Scheme.

Triton Overseas (P) Ltd. v. Union of India
156 Taxmann.com 318 · 2023 · High Court
55
citing judgments

A notice under Section 148 for income escaping assessment issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer is invalid if it does not comply with Section 151A and relevant CBDT notifications concerning faceless assessment.

Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
466 ITR 474 · 2024 · High Court
53
citing judgments

Reassessment notices under Section 148A, issued in the context of faceless assessment proceedings, must be issued by the designated Faceless Assessing Officer and not by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.

Mark Studio India (P.) Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, High Court of Madras
169 Taxmann.com 542 · 2024 · High Court
50
citing judgments

The National Faceless Assessment Centre (NaFAC) does not have the power to issue notices under Section 148 or 148A of the Income Tax Act. Its jurisdiction for assessment or reassessment begins only from the stage of issuing notices under Section 142(1) or 143(2).

Samp Furniture (P) Ltd. v. ITO
165 Taxmann.com 581 · 2024 · High Court
50
citing judgments

The issuance of a notice under section 148A, including the order under section 148A(d), is a mandatory procedural step before reassessment proceedings can be initiated under section 147/148. Failure to comply with this requirement renders the subsequent reassessment proceedings invalid.

Judgments citing faceless assessment

Shree Saraswathi Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., Hubli vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Hubli

ITA 618/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 17.09.2021 and 19.12.2019 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Hubli and the National Faceless Assessment ITA Nos. 617-618/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 9 Centre, Delhi, respectively, were dismissed. Therefore, against both these Appellate Orders, the Assessee is in appeal

Shree Saraswathi Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., Hubli vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Hubli

ITA 617/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 17.09.2021 and 19.12.2019 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Hubli and the National Faceless Assessment ITA Nos. 617-618/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 9 Centre, Delhi, respectively, were dismissed. Therefore, against both these Appellate Orders, the Assessee is in appeal

Pallavi Kamal Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6317/MUM/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt. Renu Jauhri(Physical Hearing) Pallavi Kamal Shah Ito, Ward-30(1)(1), Mumbai A-601, Bhimsen Chs Ltd., Marve Vs Maharashtra-400051. Road, Malad West, Maharashtra - 400064. [Pan: Avops7447Q] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 124Section 142Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xiv)Section 144B(1)(xvi)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as ‘the JAO’) is in complete breach of the provisions of the Faceless Assessment as provided section 144B of the Act hence, is ex- facie illegal, untenable, unsustainable in law and without jurisdiction. 1.2 On the facts and circumstances of the case ... jurisdiction and passed the reassessment order dated 24th September 2021; and (ii) the reassessment order ought to have been passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre as per the provisions of Faceless Assessment under section 144B of the Act. 1.3 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Maharashtra Airport Development Company Limited, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Delhi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1366/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmaharashtra Airport Development Company World Trade Centre, Tower-1, 8Th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai - 400005 ............... Appellant Pan: Aadcm9623M

For Appellant: Shri Rushab MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57

VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Maharashtra Airport Development Company World Trade Centre, Tower-1, 8th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai - 400005 ............... Appellant PAN: AADCM9623M v/s National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Delhi ……………… Respondent 2nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi. Assessee by : Shri Rushab Mehta Revenue by : Shri Vivek Perampurna ... assessee has raised the following grounds: – “1. a) The order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act by the National Faceless Assessment Center, Delhi (“the ld. Assessing Officer”) is without 2 jurisdiction, invalid and bad in law and against the principles of natural justice

Schineler India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dcitrg 15(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 6 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 724/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Schindler India Pvt Ltd Dcit Schindler House, Main Street, Range 15(3) (2) Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Vs. Mumbai Mumbai - 400076 (Pan: Aaecs1548J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Ms. Chandani Shah, Ms. Niddhi Agarwal & Ms. Riddhi Maru, Cas Revenue : Shri Ajay Chandra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Final Assessment Order Passed By National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (Nfac) Vide Order No. Itba/Ast/S/143(3)/2021-22/1040015716(1) Dated 22.02.2022 U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) Pursuant To The Directions Of Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel-2, Mumbai, (Drp) Vide Order No. Itba/Drp/F/144C(5)/2021-22/1039079646(1), Dated 25.01.2022, Passed U/S. 144C(5), For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: “Ground I. Legal Grounds

For Appellant: Ms. Chandani Shah, Ms. Niddhi Agarwal and Ms. Riddhi Maru, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the final assessment order passed by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (NFAC) vide order no. ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021-22/1040015716(1) dated 22.02.2022 u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

Umri Pooph Pratappur Toollway Private Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 25(1), Delhi

ITA 4747/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklaumri Pooph Pratappur Vs. Acit, Circle 25(1) Tollway Private Limited Cr Building, Ito 907, New Delhi House, Ip Estate 27 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi – 110002 Connaught Place, Delhi – 110001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcu3925G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)Section 274

arising out of the penalty order dated 22.02.2022 u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi for AY: 2018-19. 2. Heard and perused the records. The primary contention of ld. counsel was that there is grave variance

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. The Indure Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4640/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. The Indure Private Limited, Income Tax, Indure House, Greater Kailash Part Ii, Delhi South Delhi 1100 48 Pan :Aaact0121C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C

KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is against order dated 07.08.2024 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)") under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred ... stated in the assessment order that "All the contentions were carefully scrutinized, considered but the same were not tenable at the stage of faceless assessment ....". As regards the appellant's contention that it was denied cross- examination of the parties whose statements formed that basis for reopening of assessment

Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2)(1), Ghaziabad vs. Vikas Sharma, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2013-14 is dismissed

ITA 3525/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

issued to the assessee on 29.06.2022 with prior approval of the specified authority. Thereafter, the proceedings under the Faceless Assessment Regime. 3. The Assessment Unit vide order dated 23.05.2023 passed the order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144~ of the Income Tax Act making addition of Rs.34

Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2)(1), Ghaziabad vs. Vikas Sharma, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2013-14 is dismissed

ITA 3495/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

issued to the assessee on 29.06.2022 with prior approval of the specified authority. Thereafter, the proceedings under the Faceless Assessment Regime. 3. The Assessment Unit vide order dated 23.05.2023 passed the order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144~ of the Income Tax Act making addition of Rs.34

Income Tax Officer, Rohtak vs. Pankaj Jain, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2295/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaincome Tax Officer, Vs. Pankaj Jain, Rohtak. 123/34, Vishwakarma Kathmandi, Rohtak – 124 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Azupj6345A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Shri Naveen Gupta, Advocate Shri Nakul Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora,Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2025 Date Of Order : 30.12.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 04.02.2025 For The Assessment Year 2018-19 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Upholding The Validity Of The Notice Issued Under Section 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) Without The Proper & Mandatory Compliance With The Provisions Of Section 148A(B). 2. The Learned Cit(A) Has Further Erred In Law & On Facts By Failing To Consider That The Then Ao Has Given Notice U/S 148A(B) To Assessee On 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri Shri Naveen Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora,Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151ASection 292BSection 37(1)

provisions of Section 151A, notice could not be issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and should have been issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer. In view of these circumstances, the proceedings initiated against the assessee is suffered from severe legal lapses and is liable to be quashed. In this regard ... observed that the JAO and FAO have committed irreparable mistakes in 8 this assessment order and such mindless reassessment order passed by the Faceless Assessment Unit and casual approach of the JAO is not at all maintainable before the eyes of law. 7. Ld. CIT (A), after recording the above

Paramasiva Naidu Muthuvelraj Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-3, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3089/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N.V.Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, C.I.T
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

does not matter if the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) issues the notice and it is not mandatory that it should be issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO). Another learned Single Judge in order dated 21.04.2025 in WP No.22402 of 2024 and batch cases, followed what was held ... Judge was pleased to dismiss the petition on the ground that even if the notice has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer and not Faceless Assessment Officer, the notice issued under Section 148A/148 of the Income Tax Act will be valid. 3. Ms.Vardhini Karthik submitted that this Court

Paramasiva Naidu Muthuvelraj Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-3, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3088/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N.V.Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, C.I.T
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

does not matter if the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) issues the notice and it is not mandatory that it should be issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO). Another learned Single Judge in order dated 21.04.2025 in WP No.22402 of 2024 and batch cases, followed what was held ... Judge was pleased to dismiss the petition on the ground that even if the notice has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer and not Faceless Assessment Officer, the notice issued under Section 148A/148 of the Income Tax Act will be valid. 3. Ms.Vardhini Karthik submitted that this Court

Pooja Prabhakar, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 15(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3049/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. R. Venkataraman, FCA &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69Section 69ASection 69C

National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”). The said order emanates from the assessment framed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter referred to as the “AO”) u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), vide assessment ... Without prejudice to the above, that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the assessment order dated 03.03.2023 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre [“Assessing Officer’] u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2018-19 is invalid, void ab initio, and liable to be quashed

S.J. Sivagami, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw-1(7), Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3006/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Ms. Vaibhavi & Ms. Eilakiya, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, C.I.T
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 68

does not matter if the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) issues the notice and it is not mandatory that it should be issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO). Another learned Single Judge in order dated 21.04.2025 in WP No.22402 of 2024 and batch cases, followed what was held ... Judge was pleased to dismiss the petition on the ground that even if the notice has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer and not Faceless Assessment Officer, the notice issued under Section 148A/148 of the Income Tax Act will be valid. 3. Ms.Vardhini Karthik submitted that this Court

Sivarajpandi Vasantha, Thirupalai, Madurai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corp. Circle-1, Madurai, Income Tax Office

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2878/CHNY/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. Ilaiyaraja, Addl. CIT
Section 139(5)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151ASection 57

does not matter if the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) issues the notice and it is not mandatory that it should be issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO). Another learned Single Judge in order dated 21.04.2025 in WP No.22402 of 2024 and batch cases, followed what was held ... pleased to dismiss the 2. petition on the ground that even if the notice has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer and not Faceless Assessment Officer, the notice issued under Section 148A/148 of the Income Tax Act will be valid. Ms.Vardhini Karthik submitted that this Court has, in 3. many

Arulmigu Chandra Mouleeswarar Temple, Villupuram vs. ITO, Ward-1, Villupuram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2860/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Ms. R. Sumedha, Advocate for Ms. G. Vardini Karthick, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. Ilaiyaraja, Addl. CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

does not matter if the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) issues the notice and it is not mandatory that it should be issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO). Another learned Single Judge in order dated 21.04.2025 in WP No.22402 of 2024 and batch cases, followed what was held ... pleased to dismiss the 2. petition on the ground that even if the notice has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer and not Faceless Assessment Officer, the notice issued under Section 148A/148 of the Income Tax Act will be valid. Ms.Vardhini Karthik submitted that this Court has, in 3. many

Ganapathi Kanagasabai, Vellore vs. ITO, Ward 1, Vellore

ITA 2856/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Ms. T. V. Muthu Abirami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. Ilaiyaraja, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'बी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री एबी टी वर्की, न्यायिक

Shanmugasudaram, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-19(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2833/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. S. Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. Ilaiyaraja, Addl. CIT
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69

does not matter if the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) issues the notice and it is not mandatory that it should be issued by the Faceless Assessment Officer (FAO). Another learned Single Judge in order dated 21.04.2025 in WP No.22402 of 2024 and batch cases, followed what was held ... pleased to dismiss the 2. petition on the ground that even if the notice has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessment Officer and not Faceless Assessment Officer, the notice issued under Section 148A/148 of the Income Tax Act will be valid. Ms.Vardhini Karthik submitted that this Court has, in 3. many

Catholic Education Society, Mumbai vs. Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5030/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalcatholic Education Society Vs Income Tax Department Cit 338, Bb, Michael Villa, New (Exemption) Hall Road, Kurla (W), Mumbai Room No.601, 6Th Floor, 400070 Cumballa Hill Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Pan: (Aaatc5704H) Mumbai 400026 Appellant Respondent Present For: Appellant By : Dr K Shivram Sr. Advocate & Shri Shashi Bekal, Ca Respondent By : Shri R.A. Dhyani, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.12.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit(Exemptions), Mumbai Vide Order No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2024- 25/1075306167(1) Dated 30.03.2025 Passed Against Assessment Order U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 05.09.2022 For Ay 2020-21. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: “1. On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption) (Cit(E)) Has Erred In Issuing A Notice & Passing An 2

For Appellant: Dr K Shivram Sr. Advocate and Shri Shashi Bekal, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

strength of nearly 8296 students enrolled in various institutions maintained by the assessee. Case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny under faceless assessment scheme as per CASS System to verify the following two issues: 3 ITA No. 5030/Mum/2025 AY 2020-21 Catholic Education Society a. Ratio of expenditure

Pooja Prabhakar, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 15(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3045/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. R. Venkataraman, CA &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69Section 69A

National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”). The said order emanates from the assessment framed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (hereinafter referred to as the “AO”) u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), vide assessment ... Without prejudice to the above, that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the assessment order dated 23.05.2023 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre [“Assessing Officer’] u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2014-15 is invalid, void ab initio, and liable to be quashed